Bryn Mawr Escapes Students’ Disability Accommodations Claims

Three current and former Bryn Mawr College students failed to convince a federal judge that the school illegally deprived them of post-Covid accommodations for virtual learning and academic assistance, dietary requests, or transportation.

While the students “chose to largely rely upon their own views and allegations” to bolster their disabilities accommodation, retaliation, and breach of contract claims, Bryn Mawr introduced “undisputed evidence” to back its arguments, said Judge Mark A. Kearney of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, as he granted the college and its board of trustees summary judgment Thursday.

Each plaintiff alleges they were harmed when Bryn Mawr stopped offering remote courses in the fall 2021 semester following the pandemic, the judge said, citing plaintiffs’ accounts. They claim the college violated their rights under the Americans with Disabilities Act and breached their contracts.

Bryn Mawr didn’t allow Lauren De Camara, who suffered from ADHD and concussion flares, priority class registration or extra time on assignments, though she received other academic accommodations. After dropping out and returning because of concussion-related symptoms, De Camara now says she’ll only re-enroll at the school if Kearney orders Bryn Mawr to provide her with a “virtual experience,” the judge said.

Another former Bryn Mawr student, Hope Richards-Cordell, asked the school for access to its gluten-free room before starting school in fall 2021 because they assumed they have Celiac disease. But the gluten-free room didn’t accommodate their disability, they alleged.

Current student Esénia Bañuelos had diagnoses for chronic post-traumatic stress disorder and ADHD when she started at the college. She requested test-taking accommodations, including a separate room, allowance to use headphones during tests, and extra time to take them. Bryn Mawr’s access services director approved her requests, except the right to take extra time on tests.

Kearney concluded there was a genuine factual dispute regarding De Camara’s standing to sue because she intends to return to Bryn Mawr, with accommodations.

But she offered no evidence to overcome the college’s defense that her requested accommodations would significantly change its in-person class policy, the judge said. “The College does not offer complete virtual enrollment, Kearney wrote. “Ms. De Camara is asking we order the College to fundamentally alter its long-established program.”

De Camara also hasn’t introduced evidence that the school breached its contract with her by retaliating against her, despite her claims.

She doesn’t offer facts a reasonable jury could use to find the college’s decision to deny her virtual class accommodations is retaliation for reporting anti-harassment and discrimination policy violations, the judge said.

Richards-Cordell also hasn’t introduced evidence showing they are disabled under the ADA, Kearney said. This is because Celiac disease is the type of impairment that requires medical evidence to confirm a diagnosis “and explain its impact on a person’s life,” he said, but they didn’t introduce this evidence.

Kearney also agreed with the college on Bañuelos’s claim over the school’s failure to provide extra time on tests because the two-year statute of limitations applicable to ADA’s Title III bars her claim, he said.

Though the school’s access services director denied Bañuelos’s accommodation request no later than in August 2022, she didn’t sue Bryn Mawr until May of 2025, he said.

Quainton Law and Sidkoff Pincus & Green PC represent the plaintiffs. Saul Ewing LLP represents Bryn Mawr.

The case is De Camara v. Bryn Mawr Coll., 2026 BL 126983, E.D. Pa., No. 2:25-cv-02287, 4/9/26.